Re: x86: get rid of the insane TIF_ABI_PENDING bit

[Oleg Nesterov]

On 02/15, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>
> On 02/15/2010 11:41 AM, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > It affects whatever uses is_compat_task(), but I can't see anything
> > where that matters except inside some particular syscall or for
> > syscall restart after signals.
>
> FWIW, the origin of this is checkin
> 4d9bc79cd28b779610d9590b3a96a28a0f64a25a (2.6.18-rc1), which somewhat
> unhelpfully states "Make sure is_compat_task works early".  It doesn't
> specify what the failure is if is_compat_task doesn't work early.

Perhaps Andi could explain us why this is needed,

> On
> the other hand, it sure as heck seems better to set it and not need it
> than the other way around.

Agreed, but otoh it is always good to understand the code. If we
really have a reason for TS_COMPAT, a small comment can help other
readers.

Oleg.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/